CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Shamu
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visitors, PPE, testing, cleaning, shielding and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Shamu was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and COVID-19 safety measures.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 29 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors found that visitors were screened, PPE and testing were used safely, and shielding and social distancing guidance was followed. They were also assured that the home could prevent and manage infection outbreaks.
The home had an infection prevention lead, cleaning schedules and audits. People were supported to understand the pandemic, shield when needed and have safe outdoor visits to support their wellbeing.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or a rated judgement for the five quality areas.
Visitor safety
Visitors were screened for symptoms and asked set questions before visiting, to reduce the risk of infection.
“Visitors were screened for symptoms and answered set questions relating to COVID19 to ensure their visit could take place safely in line with current guidance.” from the report
Infection leadership
The home had an infection prevention lead and used information designed to help people understand the pandemic.
“The service had an infection prevention control lead. An easy read COVID19 board had been designed to support people who lived at the service to have more of an understanding about the pandemic.” from the report
Cleaning arrangements
Frequently touched surfaces were cleaned during the day, supported by audits and cleaning schedules.
“Touch points were cleaned frequently throughout the day. The registered manager had a number of infection prevention control audits and cleaning schedules in place.” from the report
Support with decisions
Where people could not consent to COVID-19 tests or vaccinations, the provider gathered evidence and consulted others before making decisions.
“Where people had been unable to consent to COVID19 tests or vaccinations, the provider had ensured appropriate evidence and consultation was made on their behalf, before decisions were made.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now, and how have they changed since the inspection on 29 March 2021?
- 02How will you support my relative to understand infection risks and any changes to visiting arrangements?
- 03How do you decide whether someone needs to shield, and how do you protect their emotional wellbeing if they cannot leave the home?
- 04How are decisions about tests and vaccinations made when a person cannot consent, and who is consulted?
- 05What are the home's current arrangements for cleaning, infection control audits and managing any outbreak?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not assess the other four quality areas or give a full overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 April 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with improvements needed in end of life planning and some parts of the building.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 7 October 2019. One inspector spoke with three people, a staff member and managers. They observed care and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home provided personal care to two people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found safe staffing, suitable training, good medicine management and care plans that reflected people's needs and choices. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect, and were supported to be independent and take part in activities.
All five CQC areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall rating stayed Good, the same as at the previous inspection published on 11 April 2017. Inspectors recommended better recording of people's wishes about their future end of life care.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment and systems to manage medicines. Staff training and competency checks supported safe practice.
“People were supported by safely recruited staff, who had the skills and knowledge to provide effective support.” from the report
Choice and independence
People helped plan and review their care. Staff supported people to make choices, build daily living skills and work towards personal goals.
“People's independence was promoted by staff.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People spoke positively about staff, and inspectors observed warm and respectful interactions. Privacy, dignity and relationships were respected.
“We observed caring interactions between people and staff.” from the report
Activities and communication
Staff supported people to follow interests, spend time with friends and use the community. Information was provided in ways people could understand.
“People were supported to access interests that were important to them.” from the report
End of life wishes
needs fixingPeople's wishes about the care they would want at the end of their lives had not been consistently recorded. The report made a recommendation for the provider to seek guidance and improve this.
“We recommend the provider seeks guidance to ensure people's advance wishes are recorded in relation to their end of life care.” from the report
Worn carpets
minorCarpets in the hall, landing and stairs were worn and stained. Managers knew about this and had sent a maintenance plan to the provider, but were waiting for approval for replacement carpets.
“Some of the environment needed improvement. For example; the carpets on the hall, landing and stairs were worn and stained.” from the report
Recording diverse needs
minorCare plans covered many diverse needs, but inspectors said some areas, including sexuality, needed to be considered more fully.
“However, some improvements were needed to ensure all areas of people's diverse needs were considered, such as sexuality.” from the report
- 01Have all residents now had a recorded discussion about their wishes for care at the end of life?
- 02Have the worn and stained carpets in the hall, landing and stairs been replaced?
- 03How do you record and review all areas of a person's diverse needs, including sexuality?
- 04How would you support my relative to develop independence and take part in interests that matter to them?
- 05How are staffing levels reviewed when people's needs or staffing arrangements change?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC key questions, including the premises and care provided; it reviewed two people's care records and one person's medication records. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 October 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Shamu
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 December 2010.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Stoke-on-Trent
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,190 a week. 93 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“She's shown compassion, patience and a level of understanding that no other carer has given.”
“She maintained a great environment for mum both with the tidiness and cleanliness of the house and Mum and with her caring and understanding attitude.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.